what medical conditions lead to denial?

[Mellymelly]

I'm a Canadian wanting to retire in Canada with my US husband. He has had spine surgery and may need more in the future. Is that a likely reason for him to be turned down for permanent residency?

[Leon]

Spouses being sponsored to Canada are exempt from the "strain on healthcare" clause so the only thing that would get him denied would be something dangerous and highly contagious which could cause a danger to your fellow Canadians.

[Mellymelly]

Thanks so much! This is the kind of info you can't find (well, I can't find) on the govt website.

[Leon]

It's at http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/manuals/op/op02-eng.pdf on page 17:

5.20. Exceptions to medical inadmissibility
A38(2)(a) states that spouses, common-law partners and dependent children who are members of
the family class are not inadmissible even if they have a medical condition that will result in
excessive demand to health or social services

[SadGirl:(]

5.20. Exceptions to medical inadmissibility A38(2)(a) states that spouses, common-law partners and dependent children who are members of the family class are not inadmissible even if they have a medical condition that will result in excessive demand to health or social services

If spouses are not inadmissable even if they have a medical condition, then what's the point of us have to redo our medicals when they expire?  Why can't they just use the first medicals that were taken?

[Leon]

There are two reasons you can be medically inadmissible, 1) you have something which will cost healthcare in Canada a lot of money to fix, 2) you have something dangerous and highly contagious which can cause a danger to Canadians.  When you are being sponsored as a spouse, you are exempt from 1) but not from 2) so you have to re-do your medicals to prove that you have not caught something in the meantime which can cause a danger to Canadians.

[rjessome]

SadGirl, they are only exempt for the "excessive demand" section.  Not from Danger to Public Health or Danger to Public Safety.  That's why it has to be done again if expired.

[SadGirl:(]

Oh, okay, that makes sense.  Thanks for the clarification!

[toby]

I am not convinced that clause 2 warrants a new medical. The idea to protect Canadians is a good one, but the second medical does not achieve that goal. This is opinion, not information, so don't read on unless you have some spare time.

What disease would be considered "dangerous and highly contagious"?  Avian or swine flu?  AIDS? Tuberculosis? What else?

Whatever it is, Canadians are not kept safe by requiring a new medical, because the Canadian sponsor will probably catch the disease from his or her spouse (because it's highly contagious), and is free to bring the disease back to Canada and Canadians. Unless Canada restricts the sponsor's movements, requiring him or her to be tested for the disease in the applicant's country, and if necessary be treated for it before coming back to Canada, Canadians are at risk.

Now, this suggestion may well seem too hard for the sponsor. If so, if requiring treatment abroad will never be required, at least Canada should recognize that a second medical is ineffective window dressing, and eliminate this unnecessary expense.


(There; that felt better.)

[Karlshammar]

Toby,

There is no fool-proof method of keeping people safe, but a second medical is better than nothing, I suppose.

[ariell]

I agree with Karishammar. A 2nd medical is not foolproof but I would say it's definitely much more than just 'window dressing". Most sponsors are not overseas with their spouses BTW. I think the majority are in Canada so it's entirely possible that the sponsored spouse could have contracted something that the sponsor has not been exposed to. Personally I'm glad that a 2nd medical is requested if it means keeping others safe.

[whoopi83]

What disease would be considered "dangerous and highly contagious"?  Avian or swine flu?  AIDS? Tuberculosis? What else?

Whatever it is, Canadians are not kept safe by requiring a new medical, because the Canadian sponsor will probably catch the disease from his or her spouse (because it's highly contagious), and is free to bring the disease back to Canada and Canadians. Unless Canada restricts the sponsor's movements, requiring him or her to be tested for the disease in the applicant's country, and if necessary be treated for it before coming back to Canada, Canadians are at risk.

Now, this suggestion may well seem too hard for the sponsor. If so, if requiring treatment abroad will never be required, at least Canada should recognize that a second medical is ineffective window dressing, and eliminate this unnecessary expense.


(There; that felt better.)

Hmm.... IMO, Canada cannot exclude Canadians from returning home regardless of their medical status, so to require a medical would be self defeating to some extent.  Where are a country's sick citizens to go if they cannot return home if they contract any kind of disease?

As to what is dangerous/highly contagious, HIV would not necessarily bar someone unless they had something contagious - TB is an example somewhere on the CIC website - it appears they are looking at the spread of diseases that one can pass on passively rather than actively.

[rjessome]

I agree Whoopi.  To tell a Canadian they can't go home if they are sick is ridiculous.  You know, not all countries are created equal.  We may not allow someone to enter Canada because of their health condition but we don't kick them out if they are here and sick.  Yep, first we treat them and then we send them home!  In all seriousness though, not all countries are so nice.  Toby, your suggestion could potentially leave a Canadian stateless.  I know you are frustrated because you are anticipating a 2nd medical for your wife but believe me, I've been around these boards a long time and I've seen people approved through China in a year.  Don't put the cart before the horse.

[welsh]

Is Genital Herpes a cause of denial? I think its very common in US & Canada

[rjessome]

No and they don't test for it.